[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56B15067.6000407@stressinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 01:57:11 +0100
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Simon McVittie <simon.mcvittie@...labora.co.uk>,
Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
???????? ?????????????????? <socketpair@...il.com>,
David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] unix: properly account for FDs passed over unix
sockets
On 02.02.2016 23:11, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [ sorry for the html mail, I'm out grocery shopping ]
>
> On Feb 2, 2016 13:55, "Hannes Frederic Sowa" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> I slightly tested the attached patch.
>
> Looks fine. I do wonder: if the only thing we use that "struct cred" for is
> to do that ->user lookup, maybe we should just use "struct user_struct"
> directly, and skip the cred entirely.
>
> Something like
>
> fp->user = get_uid(current_user());
>
> and then
>
> put_uid(fp->user);
>
> But I'm OK with that patch as is if you prefer it that way (maybe you want
> to use the cred to then test for root separately etc, out maybe there
> already was done use of cred as cred that I just missed when reading the
> patch on my phone..)
I don't see any reason to switch over to struct user_struct. I tested a
patch and will send it out soon.
Bye,
Hannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists